Tue. Oct 20th, 2020

From SafeWaterMarin Alliance,  – October 31, 2016 – Credit to  Arlene Goetze, Health Writer, Oct. 26, 2016 – Some 50 peaceful protesters gathered outside the Santa Clara Valley Water District, SCVWD, headquarters October 25 to educate, sue, and ask the water board to stop its plans for fluoridation of 21 zip codes in San Jose and 4 other towns on December 5.

Attorney Gary Wesley files lawsuit challenging the legality of water fluoridation in San Jose!

Attorney Wesley’s lawsuit states the wholesale water board does not by law have the power to put an ‘untested’ drug in drinking water.

Speaking against fluoride, Dr. David Kennedy, world lecturer and former President of International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, explained the FDA action stopping the sale of fluoride supplements this year. He spoke about dose and concentration of the hydrofluosilicic acid, HFSA, a toxic waste from phosphate fertilizer that is used to fluoridate.
Dr Keith Howe, who does his own kidney dialysis which must not use fluoride, discussed many damages to the kidney and other organs.

3 thoughts on “Lawsuit filed challenging legality of water fluoridation”
  1. Sent via email from New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation:

    “Billy Budd” is Chuck Haynie, a member of the pro-fluoridation lobbying group, the American Fluoridation Society.

    Of course, he can’t be trusted because there is not any overwhelming evidence that fluoridation is safe. In fact, their PR guru teaches them to stay off the topic of safety because they can’t defend safety with science.

    The truth is that fluoridation is built on a house of cards, starting with the first human health experiment. The Kingston/Newburgh fluoridation experiment started in 1945, planned to last for ten to 15 years, but was declared a success after just five years because of political pressure, even though the teeth of those born into the experiment hadn’t even erupted yet.

    And, unbelievably, those school children sick two weeks before examination were excluded from the results – the very children who could have been made sick by fluoride. Toddlers and adults were not included in the study. Long term effects were never followed.

    In 1955, State University of New York researchers found more bone defects, anemia and early puberty in fluoridated Newburgh school children when compared to non-fluoridated Kingston. There have been no similar health studies since then.

    Fifty years after the experiment began, tooth decay and fluoride overdose symptoms, dental fluorosis, are higher in fluoridated Newburgh children than never fluoridated Kingston school children.

    Fluoridation began with the mistaken belief that ingesting fluoride was essential for healthy teeth. Modern science disproved all that. Fluoride is not a nutrient, essential and swallowing it only leads to adverse effects.

    Most troubling is that we now know that fluoride can get into the brain – something that wasn’t even considered when fluoridation began. That simple knowledge, alone, should put an end to fluoridation schemes world wide. Unfortunately, politics not science keeps fluoridation afloat

    Over a hundred animal studies and 50 human studies (from other countries) now show that fluoride can alter the brain.

    “Billy Budd” says water supplies are fluoride deficient; but no human is, or ever was, fluoride deficient. Fluoride is more toxic than lead.

    Even the US EPA lists fluoride as having “Substantial Evidence of Developmental Neurotoxicity.”

    No American ever gave their consent to be used as guinea pigs in this ongoing failed public health experiment.

  2. Fluoridation has been decided, over and over again by California courts and courts around the country to not being the act of medicating. It, rather is simply the adjustment of a normal mineral component present in all natural waters to that which is most healthy.

    The reality is that there is overwhelming scientific and professional consensus that fluoridation prevents cavities, is safe and return a big investment by way of less oral disease and lower dental bills. This is the reason the California legislature passed the law which makes clear the obligation of fluoridation in these communities.

    The last California court case ( Foli vs Metropolitan Water District ), a Federal court case from San Diego, was dismissed in 2013. This suit will also fail.

  3. Remember, if the arguments against fluoride were so good , you would think they would stand up to public scrutiny on their own merit, without legal help. Or threats of. If they have to take legal action to pass them, it is obvious they are not.

    Maybe that is why they need a lawyer in charge, To bully and threaten towns, because the fairy tales dont stack up.

    And also if the arguments against fluoride were so good, The illnesses and associated medical problems that fluoride is supposed to cause, at .7PPM, would have well and truly been investigated in the 70 years of its use, And what do we find as real evidence that will sway the authorities. Nothing

    And if the arguments against fluoride were so good , Why do they ban anyone from their social media pages who questions there ideology?Could be they cant answer the hard questions,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.